The Japanese government is planning to connect major cities with automated zero-emissions logistics links that can quietly and efficiently shift millions of tons of cargo, while getting tens of thousands of trucks off the road.
The fact that it’s Japan (a place with a damn good rep for trains) planning to make a giant conveyor system between 2 cities rather than a freight line is what’s so shocking to me.
They’re going to have to clear a lot of stuff for a big conveyor system why not do it properly and go with freight trains?
Trains are a tried and true method of moving freight, they have a bunch of skilled engineers already versed in trains, they have all the necessary industry for getting the parts for those trains built, etc, etc. This just screams stupid AF and wasteful AF to me.
They’re going to have to clear a lot of stuff for a big conveyor system why not do it properly and go with freight trains?
They would have to do the exact same thing for trains, though. Do you have any comments on the actual differences in the projects, or do you only have (probably rightfully-placed, but still) knee-jerk reactions to your favorite vehicle?
Although I agree that other forms of transport should be considered, I genuinely can’t figure out how either a conveyor belt or autonomous carts could be better than a freight train. Both for battling decreasing manpower and for intercity freight transport.
I think both proposed ideas are better for short-distance transport, with conveyor belts better for a single direction of movement in indoor (or as the article mentions, tunnel) conditions (must be kept clear of debris in order to run, more so than track which only needs to be cleared before the next train) and autonomous carts better for transporting small packages between many origins and destinations (eg. a warehouse or maybe delivery service).
Conveyor belts might also require much more maintenance, as moving parts would be all along the length of the belt.
Japan has outstanding high speed rail but that’s pretty much it. Local train servives are, from what I’ve heard, subpar in terms of frequency. The share of goods transported via rail is also comparatively low.
Check out these numbers and sort by each colum, Switzerland is always near the top (for population/size adjusted values)
Your link doesn’t show Switzerland at the top except their network is completely electric.
Having been to both countries without a car, Japan is not subpar in terms of local services. They’re very different though because they have such different size and population densities.
the lowest amount of area per km of track, except for micro nations
a fairly low amount of population per km of track - among the top 10 if population density is considered
lost less than 10% of tracks since its historical peak
a majority nationalized rail network
(as you mentioned) a fully electrified network
While I haven’t travelled in Japan by rail (or any other mode), I have been to Switzerland. From what I’ve heard, in Japan there are many smaller local stations, where an ancient train arrives a few times a day.
Whereas in Switzerland, it seems like nearly every local station has at least one train per hour.
It is true that in Japan there are many local stations that only arrive a few times a day, but I’ve found that this is generally for places that are very low traffic; ala middle of nowhere Fukushima countryside train. I’m usually more surpised the train system even goes there than I am surprised by the frequency. For pretty much anywhere you’d expect local trains to exist, they’re usually very good. Not trying to compare countries or anything (I’ve never been to Switzerland). Just describing my experience in Japan (not expert; only lived there ~6mo)
It’s a tiny station with 440 passengers per weekday - yet it seems that two train lines, one of which is hourly stop there. Most of the passengers are likely commuters, so the bulk of all passengers will be during morning and evening rush hour. Outside these hours, hardly anyone uses this station I believe - yet trains still stop there.
(Note: I have just searched for “Least used train stations Switzerland” and picked a random result, this might be an exception. But it goes to show that stations with few passengers still get a lot of connections.)
As I said, I’m not trying to compare or enter a discussion about what system is better, since I’ve never been to Switzerland. I like it when places have good trains, and it sounds like both places have that. So that’s good enough for me. I was just replying to give you a better idea of what it’s like in Japan.
Umm this is Japan…? Is there a place with better trains?
The fact that it’s Japan (a place with a damn good rep for trains) planning to make a giant conveyor system between 2 cities rather than a freight line is what’s so shocking to me.
They’re going to have to clear a lot of stuff for a big conveyor system why not do it properly and go with freight trains?
Trains are a tried and true method of moving freight, they have a bunch of skilled engineers already versed in trains, they have all the necessary industry for getting the parts for those trains built, etc, etc. This just screams stupid AF and wasteful AF to me.
They would have to do the exact same thing for trains, though. Do you have any comments on the actual differences in the projects, or do you only have (probably rightfully-placed, but still) knee-jerk reactions to your favorite vehicle?
I see you stopped reading my comment there.
I listed some reasons in the comment literally right after that.
“Trains already exist” doesn’t address literally any part of the other project. Horses existed before cars, too.
Although I agree that other forms of transport should be considered, I genuinely can’t figure out how either a conveyor belt or autonomous carts could be better than a freight train. Both for battling decreasing manpower and for intercity freight transport.
I think both proposed ideas are better for short-distance transport, with conveyor belts better for a single direction of movement in indoor (or as the article mentions, tunnel) conditions (must be kept clear of debris in order to run, more so than track which only needs to be cleared before the next train) and autonomous carts better for transporting small packages between many origins and destinations (eg. a warehouse or maybe delivery service).
Conveyor belts might also require much more maintenance, as moving parts would be all along the length of the belt.
Switzerland.
Japan has outstanding high speed rail but that’s pretty much it. Local train servives are, from what I’ve heard, subpar in terms of frequency. The share of goods transported via rail is also comparatively low.
Check out these numbers and sort by each colum, Switzerland is always near the top (for population/size adjusted values)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_rail_transport_network_size#Countries_with_active_network
Your link doesn’t show Switzerland at the top except their network is completely electric.
Having been to both countries without a car, Japan is not subpar in terms of local services. They’re very different though because they have such different size and population densities.
Switzerland has:
While I haven’t travelled in Japan by rail (or any other mode), I have been to Switzerland. From what I’ve heard, in Japan there are many smaller local stations, where an ancient train arrives a few times a day.
Whereas in Switzerland, it seems like nearly every local station has at least one train per hour.
It is true that in Japan there are many local stations that only arrive a few times a day, but I’ve found that this is generally for places that are very low traffic; ala middle of nowhere Fukushima countryside train. I’m usually more surpised the train system even goes there than I am surprised by the frequency. For pretty much anywhere you’d expect local trains to exist, they’re usually very good. Not trying to compare countries or anything (I’ve never been to Switzerland). Just describing my experience in Japan (not expert; only lived there ~6mo)
But Switzerland has these tiny local stations too.
For example, this one:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alp_Grüm_railway_station
It’s a tiny station with 440 passengers per weekday - yet it seems that two train lines, one of which is hourly stop there. Most of the passengers are likely commuters, so the bulk of all passengers will be during morning and evening rush hour. Outside these hours, hardly anyone uses this station I believe - yet trains still stop there.
(Note: I have just searched for “Least used train stations Switzerland” and picked a random result, this might be an exception. But it goes to show that stations with few passengers still get a lot of connections.)
As I said, I’m not trying to compare or enter a discussion about what system is better, since I’ve never been to Switzerland. I like it when places have good trains, and it sounds like both places have that. So that’s good enough for me. I was just replying to give you a better idea of what it’s like in Japan.
Yeah fair enough. Japan has great rail, I’m just frustrated that prestige projects like HSR seem to be everyone’s focus.
HSR is important, but local trains and freight trains are equally as important even though they get much less attention.
That’s why this sounds so ridiculous!
Switzerland